Perpetual Toil
Member
- 96
- 65
Although I am not in the camp that thinks this AC is boring, I do agree with them that it could be more exciting. However, the lack of excitement has nothing to do with the boats. Rather, it is exciting almost exclusively because of the boats. If there is an area where the excitement dial could be turned up a bit, it’s the format.
Any interesting sport has a good balance of fairness and unpredictability. After four races, this AC looks very predictable: win the start, sail clean and you win the race. Changing the platform for more traditional boats only introduces more predictability because they are known entities. There might be greater diversity in manoeuvres – e.g., we might see more hooks at the start if it is easier to get a hook in a displacement boat – but they will still be known manoeuvres. Despite the predictability of the races, The AC75s still have some unknown elements to them and areas to improve (e.g., playing with canting angle in tacks, as Mozzy Sails pointed out).
In order to introduce more unpredictability in the race, and thus more excitement, the most logical area to tinker with is the format. For example, right now there is not a lot of wind variability on the course, which results in little room, or incentive to hunt, for passing lanes. Tacking/gybing translates into roughly a 50m loss each time, so there is a strong incentive to reduce manoeuvres and sail boundary to boundary. Increasing the size of the course would increase the wind variability, and thus lead to less predictable results.
Another area to introduce more risk taking is the penalties. JS was criticized for trying a luff in race 1 whose risk greatly outweighed its reward, which would have been a measly 50m penalty. Increase the reward for penalties and there is a greater incentive to take riskier manoeuvres. Perhaps the rule makers do not want to incentive that kind of risk taking for safety concerns. It’s just an example.
The point is that if the game isn’t exciting, change the format rules, not the equipment. When the NHL wanted to increase scoring and open up the ice, they removed the two-line pass. When the NBA began having players who could jump high enough block any shot arcing down toward the rim, they introduced goaltending to prevent that. When the NFL wanted to see more passing offence and fewer kicks, they moved the goalposts from the front to the back of the endzone.
All this to say that the last thing I would change about this AC is the boats. They are, for me anyway, the most thrilling thing on water; I would be happy just to watch them practice. Looking back at the 72s, it seemed hard to imagine anything as exciting or more than those foiling cats. The 75s do that and give the impression that we are witnessing a prolonged Wright brothers moment in sailing.
Any interesting sport has a good balance of fairness and unpredictability. After four races, this AC looks very predictable: win the start, sail clean and you win the race. Changing the platform for more traditional boats only introduces more predictability because they are known entities. There might be greater diversity in manoeuvres – e.g., we might see more hooks at the start if it is easier to get a hook in a displacement boat – but they will still be known manoeuvres. Despite the predictability of the races, The AC75s still have some unknown elements to them and areas to improve (e.g., playing with canting angle in tacks, as Mozzy Sails pointed out).
In order to introduce more unpredictability in the race, and thus more excitement, the most logical area to tinker with is the format. For example, right now there is not a lot of wind variability on the course, which results in little room, or incentive to hunt, for passing lanes. Tacking/gybing translates into roughly a 50m loss each time, so there is a strong incentive to reduce manoeuvres and sail boundary to boundary. Increasing the size of the course would increase the wind variability, and thus lead to less predictable results.
Another area to introduce more risk taking is the penalties. JS was criticized for trying a luff in race 1 whose risk greatly outweighed its reward, which would have been a measly 50m penalty. Increase the reward for penalties and there is a greater incentive to take riskier manoeuvres. Perhaps the rule makers do not want to incentive that kind of risk taking for safety concerns. It’s just an example.
The point is that if the game isn’t exciting, change the format rules, not the equipment. When the NHL wanted to increase scoring and open up the ice, they removed the two-line pass. When the NBA began having players who could jump high enough block any shot arcing down toward the rim, they introduced goaltending to prevent that. When the NFL wanted to see more passing offence and fewer kicks, they moved the goalposts from the front to the back of the endzone.
All this to say that the last thing I would change about this AC is the boats. They are, for me anyway, the most thrilling thing on water; I would be happy just to watch them practice. Looking back at the 72s, it seemed hard to imagine anything as exciting or more than those foiling cats. The 75s do that and give the impression that we are witnessing a prolonged Wright brothers moment in sailing.
